The group sued in April to overturn the law on grounds
that it
unconstitutionally inhibits adults' and teenagers' online
speech in the interest of protecting children from Web sites, chat rooms, or
email that contain adult language, nudity, or pornography.

The judge didn't grant New Mexico's request to dismiss the case.

Republican Sen. Stuart Ingle introduced the state legislation that makes it a misdemeanor to use a computer to knowingly
disseminate to those under age 18 material that "in whole or in part
depicts actual or simulated nudity, sexual intercourse, or any other sexual
conduct." Violators could face up to one year in jail or a $1,000 fine.

Free speech advocates contend that the trouble with such laws is
that the broad terms "harmful," "indecent," or "obscene" could apply to Web
sites about safe sex, gay and lesbian issues, or anatomy. Moreover, on the
Net it can be impossible to know who is on the receiving end of data
transmissions, the ACLU argues.

The plaintiffs charge that the law violates the First Amendment, citing the
Supreme Court's decision to throw out the Communications Decency
Act, which made it a felony to use the Net to show or send "indecent"
content to those under age 18.

In addition to the CDA ruling, the ACLU will rely on another federal
decision it helped to win: the American Library
Association vs. (New York Gov.) George Pataki. Last June, U.S. District
Judge Loretta
Preska ruled that New York's CDA-like law was
unconstitutional on the grounds that it violated the Constitution's
commerce clause, which forbids one state from regulating another state's
commercial activity.

In February, the ACLU won its lawsuit
against a two-year-old Virginia law that prohibited state employees from
using the Net to view sexually explicit material. U.S. Eastern District
Court Judge Leonie Brinkema ruled in favor of the ACLU and six college
professors, stating that the 1996 law violated the First Amendment by
restricting access to online literature, history, philosophy, or medical
information.